So they adjusted the prices of all ships, supposedly to "reflect their combat power", and "aid the AI and Auto Resolve". So basically, they're saying that they're fudging the AI's decisions, and how Auto Resolve battles are decided, simply by comparing the cost of the ships?
Something like that, probably. I never auto resolve, it always leads to my ships taking stupid ammounts of damage from enemies I could have gunned down without taking a single hit in return if I did it manually. Also, I have no idea how the new costs are supposed to "reflect their combat power"... My Beijing class BC's cost 500 million before, now they're 1 billion. The Japanese CA's cost 480 million before, now 1.2 billion, and I'm fairly confident in claiming my BC's have quite a bit more "combat power" than those CA's!
@Panzergraf I think it's a nothing change. The AI is just going to be given funnymoney their solution is to make the player fight outnumbered all the time. And that won't hurt the player anyway, as you said you don't auto resolve and either do I. I think they don't know how to help their AI make decisions that humans instantly do. You and I won't run 2 heavy cruisers into a fleet of light cruisers cause we assume there will be torpedoes. The ai can see our ships knows how they are built and doesn't evaluate that it should fight a stand off engagement / maintain distance. If they are going to use cost to assign a combat power score I don't think that will help the ai to stop death riding their fleets into meat grinders.
The name of the destroyer you didn't know how to pronounce could be said something like "Chongchingbay." The q in pinyin (the system for writing Chinese using the Roman alphabet) is pronounced more like 'ch.' Chongqing is a major city in China, the 'bei' here probably should be běi meaning "North." So the name likely means "North Chonqing."
Thankfully none of my ships ended up overweight I am now running a fairly large deficit so much for my upgrade plans of essentially fielding a high/lo navy where I keep the last generation around as my low ships and create new ships for my task forces, and when I have a design that is a significant upgrade I lay down 4 ships of the new class rotate 4 of the last class to harbour duties and finally mothball / scrap the last lo generation. Does seem like they are hitting the player with the nerf bat because the AI is anything but intelligent right now. I don't think this will really affect my ability to win battles because I abuse the absolute hell out of mines and submarines.
You're not the only one that has been saying that, and for quite some time - that instead of putting in the work to upgrade their AI, and fix many other long standing issues with the game, it's far easier for them to simply make it more difficult for the player to accomplish anything in game - plus give the AI some specific "cheats".
Yeah they make adjustments but never fix the things that matter like the retargeting.
So they adjusted the prices of all ships, supposedly to "reflect their combat power", and "aid the AI and Auto Resolve".
So basically, they're saying that they're fudging the AI's decisions, and how Auto Resolve battles are decided, simply by comparing the cost of the ships?
Something like that, probably.
I never auto resolve, it always leads to my ships taking stupid ammounts of damage from enemies I could have gunned down without taking a single hit in return if I did it manually.
Also, I have no idea how the new costs are supposed to "reflect their combat power"...
My Beijing class BC's cost 500 million before, now they're 1 billion.
The Japanese CA's cost 480 million before, now 1.2 billion, and I'm fairly confident in claiming my BC's have quite a bit more "combat power" than those CA's!
@Panzergraf I think it's a nothing change. The AI is just going to be given funnymoney their solution is to make the player fight outnumbered all the time. And that won't hurt the player anyway, as you said you don't auto resolve and either do I.
I think they don't know how to help their AI make decisions that humans instantly do. You and I won't run 2 heavy cruisers into a fleet of light cruisers cause we assume there will be torpedoes. The ai can see our ships knows how they are built and doesn't evaluate that it should fight a stand off engagement / maintain distance. If they are going to use cost to assign a combat power score I don't think that will help the ai to stop death riding their fleets into meat grinders.
The name of the destroyer you didn't know how to pronounce could be said something like "Chongchingbay." The q in pinyin (the system for writing Chinese using the Roman alphabet) is pronounced more like 'ch.'
Chongqing is a major city in China, the 'bei' here probably should be běi meaning "North." So the name likely means "North Chonqing."
3 Billion $ BB vs one lucky SoB
Thankfully none of my ships ended up overweight I am now running a fairly large deficit so much for my upgrade plans of essentially fielding a high/lo navy where I keep the last generation around as my low ships and create new ships for my task forces, and when I have a design that is a significant upgrade I lay down 4 ships of the new class rotate 4 of the last class to harbour duties and finally mothball / scrap the last lo generation.
Does seem like they are hitting the player with the nerf bat because the AI is anything but intelligent right now. I don't think this will really affect my ability to win battles because I abuse the absolute hell out of mines and submarines.
You're not the only one that has been saying that, and for quite some time - that instead of putting in the work to upgrade their AI, and fix many other long standing issues with the game, it's far easier for them to simply make it more difficult for the player to accomplish anything in game - plus give the AI some specific "cheats".
🍔